On Tue, Dec 15, 2020, 5:35 PM Johnny Hughes <johnny at centos.org> wrote: > On 12/15/20 5:11 PM, Phelps, Matthew wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 5:04 PM Johnny Hughes <johnny at centos.org> wrote: > > > >> On 12/14/20 8:25 AM, James Pearson wrote: > >>> Nicolas Kovacs > >>>> > >>>> Here's an interesting read which makes a point for CentOS Stream: > >>>> > >>>> > >> > https://freedomben.medium.com/centos-is-not-dead-please-stop-saying-it-is-at-least-until-you-read-this-4b26b5c44877 > >>>> > >>>> tl;dr: Communication about Stream was BAD, but Stream itself might be > a > >> good > >>>> thing. Here's why. > >>> > >>> As others have said, it misses the _really_ important bit about the > >> traditional CentOS model which is to follow the RHEL ~10 year life > cycle> > >>> It doesn't matter how good/rock solid/whatever CentOS Stream turns out > >> to be, but if it only has a 5 year life cycle for each major release, > then > >> it no good to me (and I suspect many others) > >>> > >> > >> > >> There is a 2 year overlap with the next version of stream as well .. in > >> this case CentOS Stream 9. How long is Debian or Ubuntu LTS maintained > >> for free? > >> > >> 5 years may not be long enough for you .. but it certainly pretty long. > >> And I am TRYING to get that extended. I may not be successful, we'll > >> have to see. > >> > >>> The article also mentions "CentOS will no longer be old, crusty, and > >> barely alive, trailing RHEL by months at times" - then why didn't Redhat > >> put resources into CentOS to improve that? > >>> > >> > >> Do you have any idea how much money Red Hat is paying to maintain > >> CentOS. And they are maintaining CentOS 7, even now, until 2024. There > >> are dozens of machines and several administrators to maintain them. > >> > >>> Redhat must have known, that if they killed off traditional CentOS, > then > >> users will simply go elsewhere for a RHEL rebuild ? > >> > >> If you chose not to use CentOS Stream, that is up to you. What is the > >> OS of your TV set. What is the firmware of your computer. Those things > >> are now pretty much irrelevant and commoditized. > >> > >> At some point the underlying OS is going to be much less important and > >> the important part will be the layered parts that contain your apps and > >> not the OS Layer. > >> > >> If you want a RHEL clone, that's fine. There will be one available. > >> Someone will make one. > >> > >> The real and complete vision of what CentOS Stream will become will not > >> be compolete until around the end of QTR1 2021. If you chose not to try > >> it, that is up to you. I truly think Stream will be a much better and > >> more quickly fixed OS when everything is in place. > >> > > > > I don't expect you to answer Johnny, but why didn't Red Hat wait until > > Stream was "complete'" or ready, or whatever. > > I have no idea. I am not saying I completely agree with the timing or > the way this went down. But we are where we are now. I still think > CentOS Stream is as good as any other "Enterprise" distro out there. I > think iti si just as good as Debian and/or Ubuntu. > > This is the problem they created, your right stream is "just as good as the other Enterprise distro's out there." But that is part of the issue, since your just as good and no longer have the long support cycles then I just as well spend time porting it to Debian etc. The way that they did it just leaves a lot of bad faith in anything that RH has to say now, at least for me I have lost all trust in anything they have to say. I mean you know it's bad when people are talking about migrating to Oracle, that's pretty ironic of all things. I've been on the list since 2007 and again I appreciate all the hard work over the years that you and the others have given to the project, it's just a shame that RH decided to take the path that it taken. >